Shocked

[lococnc]

I have been using my custom "Regen until complete" program and I find
it so useful that I am shocked PTC does not have this as built-in
functionality.

Does no one else find it annoying to have to press the regen button
multiple times to get a complete regeneration of a complex model?

[mdebower]

Personally, I have always viewed having to regen multiple times as a sign of something being wrong.... A CRC for example. With the ability to move relations to the footer in recent releases, even more so.

-marc

[ptc-218373]

The only times I've seen the need to regen more than once is when there's a
confusion of external references (where parents are dependent on children
for geometry and/or placement, and vice-versa); and where relations are out
of order. If you keep your modeling in a parallel manner (as in top-down)
rather than serial, regen once should be all you need. But I agree that
Pro/E should be able to give you more of a warning/explanation if there's a
regen problem.


David Tate
Keystroke Designs,
Kelowna, BC, Canada
250-763-6633
250-212-9339 cell

[BobFrindt]

I'm with you Marc,
My initial thought on this was that it was something where the user is
pressing the envelope of Pro's capabilities, but I have never run into a
situation where multiple regens are needed unless I don't have the
relations sorted or there is a CRC.

I'd be interested in an example where this is the case.

Thanks,

Bob Frindt
Sr. Designer
Parker Hannifin Corporation
Parker Aerospace
Gas Turbine Fuel Systems Division
8940 Tyler Boulevard
Mentor, OH 44060 USA
direct (440) 266-2359
cell: (216) 990-8711
fax: (440) 266-2311
-
www.parker.com



Marc DeBower <->
11/29/2010 03:20 PM
Please respond to
Marc DeBower <->


To
-
cc

Subject
[proecad] - RE: Shocked






Personally, I have always viewed having to regen multiple times as a sign
of something being wrong.... A CRC for example. With the ability to
move relations to the footer in recent releases, even more so.
-marc


Site Links: View post online View mailing list online Send new post
via email Unsubscribe from this mailing list Manage your subscription

Use of this email content is governed by the terms of service at:

privileged. It only should be used or disseminated for the purpose
of conducting business with Parker. If you are not an intended
recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and
then delete the information from your system. Thank you for your
cooperation."

[lococnc]

Interesting.

I have many models which we consider "universal" They are setup to adapt
themselves to many design variations. Quite complex. Pro/E does not fully
regenerate all dimensions using the regen button. It knows that they need to
be updated but it just doesn't do it. The order of the relations may have
something to do with it, however we have to group a bunch of things under
IF-THEN-ELSE statements to bring about the variation. I suppose I could
seperate some of the stuff into later IF statements but it would make it
almost impossible to make changes to the structure.

[MikeFoster]

All,

CRC's and out of order relations aren't the only reasons a model might need multiple regens. We use flexible components in our deployable assemblies in order to show them in different positions. For example, we frequently need to show a model in different states in different views on the same drawing. When sub-subassemblies have flexibility more than one regen is needed to propagate the flexibility to all the right models.

Michael, Can I get more info on your custom "Regen until complete" program?

Thanks,

Mike Foster
ATK

[ptc-169947]

Hi all,

When creating a new drawing, we currently choose a template (inch or metric), which opens the drawing with the rectanglular border. The drawing is then created, and at some point add a format gets added to it. The title block info is driven by part parameters and the drawing rev and release level is driven by Intralink. We plan on having the same setup when moving to 9.1

An option being considered is to combine the template with the format so that the format comes up and doesn't have to be added. Is inserting a format after the fact poor practice, or is it more flexible?
Curious as to what others are doing.

Thanks,
Stefan

[BrentDrysdale]

Hi Stefan,
We only have to deal with metric so need less choice. We have templates for
A4 through to A0 and each of these calls in a format of that size. The
format has all the titleblock variables automatically filled in from
parameters in the part or assembly. These show as default values if the
parameters have not been updated in the part/assembly. This also covers use
of ISO tolerance classes in the titleblock. We use the same format for
every sheet in a drawing so this ensures they all have the correct
information.
Works really well.



Regards, Brent Drysdale
Senior Mechanical Designer
Tait Radio Communications
New Zealand
DDI +64 3 358 1093
www.taitradio.com

[bfrandsen]

Stefan,
we keep template drawing and formats separated for maintenance reasons.
If you need to change a config.dtl option you will have to do that on
every template drawing as it is stored there.
A change to the format is the same amount of works in both use cases.

/Bjarne



"Mueller, Stefan" <->
30-11-2010 22:11
Please respond to
"Mueller, Stefan" <->


To
"-" <->
cc

Subject
[proecad] - Detail files and formats






Hi all,

When creating a new drawing, we currently choose a template (inch or
metric), which opens the drawing with the rectanglular border. The drawing
is then created, and at some point add a format gets added to it. The
title block info is driven by part parameters and the drawing rev and
release level is driven by Intralink. We plan on having the same setup
when moving to 9.1

An option being considered is to combine the template with the format so
that the format comes up and doesn't have to be added. Is inserting a
format after the fact poor practice, or is it more flexible?
Curious as to what others are doing.

Thanks,
Stefan









Site Links: View post online View mailing list online Send new post
via email Unsubscribe from this mailing list Manage your subscription
Use of this email content is governed by the terms of service at:

[MikeFoster]

Hi Stefan,

In order to drive the title block info using part parameters you need to add the format to the drawing after the part model has been added to the drawing.

Otherwise those model parameter expressions convert themselves to look for a drawing parameters of the same name - they essentially add a ":D" to themselves. For example "&proi_revision" turns itself into "&proi_revision:d" and displays the drawing revision instead of the model revision which is very irritating.

Drawing templates are supposed to save users from carrying out repetitive steps but they don't do it very well for those who want model parameters to drive their title block information. Pro/E has always had this nonsensical functionality and they didn't fix it when drawing templates were introduced a dozen or so years ago. Nothing has changed in Intralink 9.1.

We wound up changing our formats to display drawing parameters rather than model parameters which PTC suggested is the right way to use templates.

Regards,

Mike Foster
ATK

[esherwood]

We use Intralink 9.1 and drawing templates (WF 4.0). It isn't easy, but it is possible to link model parameters to the drawing parameters. For example, the description of the drawing is automatically the same as the description of the part.

TPI 114055 will get you started.

You can go to tools, drawing program in the template but the first trick is there needs to be a dummy model in the template. When youÂ’re done writing the program, remove the dummy model from the template drawing.

The other trick, is the driving parameter must not exist in the template. It has to be created by the drawing program at the time the model is added. You may need to delete the parameter from the template or the dummy part before you write the program.

And the next trick; if the parameter does not exist, it canÂ’t be declared. It is important to declare the parameter so that it can be shown in intralink browsers. The only way I could figure out how to do it is to use 2 equal parameters in the part model. The driven parameter exists in the template, and is declared. The driving only exists in the part, not the drawing.

Part relation:
Title1=Description

Drawing program: Description is declared, title1 does not exist.
Description:D = title1

Last trick, once you remove your model from the template, it can freeze your BOM table. Re-insert the table.

I said it wasnÂ’t easy.

Erik

[dgallup]

We use drawing templates with formats and I don't have any problem showing model parameters in them. We don't use any data manager so maybe that is the difference. I created the drawing formats long ago, they are all multi sheet formats with an extensive title block on the first sheet and a simplified title block on the subsequent sheets. The drawing template only has one sheet but if you add additional sheets in the drawing it correctly pulls the simplified format. I have separate templates for A0, A1 & A2 sizes in both inch and metric units (6 total).

The only parameter I have trouble with is &todays_date. It used to reside in the format and was evaluated at the time of drawing creation. Pro/E always wants to evaluate it at the time of drawing template creation. I ended up just putting a string of dashes as a place holder in the template and the draftsperson has to change it when the drawing is created. We have a mapkey that changes any text string to &todays_date which is convenient but you have to remember to do it.

In Reply to Stefan Mueller:

Hi all,

When creating a new drawing, we currently choose a template (inch or metric), which opens the drawing with the rectanglular border. The drawing is then created, and at some point add a format gets added to it. The title block info is driven by part parameters and the drawing rev and release level is driven by Intralink. We plan on having the same setup when moving to 9.1

An option being considered is to combine the template with the format so that the format comes up and doesn't have to be added. Is inserting a format after the fact poor practice, or is it more flexible?
Curious as to what others are doing.

Thanks,
Stefan